The DOI matches its Crossref record; none of the 7 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Inscriptions inédites de l'Asie Mineure
Open accessAbstract
Ramsay William Mitchell. Inscriptions inédites de l'Asie Mineure. In: Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. Volume 7, 1883. pp. 297-328.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Ramsay publishes previously unedited Greek inscriptions from Asia Minor, chiefly from Synnada in Phrygia, with commentary on Roman provincial administration and civic institutions. The most consequential claim is that an honorific text for Lucullus shows Synnada belonged to the province of Asia during his governorship.
Key findings
- Inscription no. 22, on a small hexagonal marble column at Synnada, honours "Λεύκιον ... Λικίννιον ... Λευκίου υἱόν, Λεύκο[λλ]ον" as patron and benefactor. Ramsay reads it as evidence that "Synnada was included in the province of Asia at the time when Lucullus governed it," and argues the city was attached to Cilicia under Dolabella in 80 B.C., the change being made "for the first time in this year."
- Ramsay treats the inscription as a commentary on Cicero, *Acad.* II. 1 ("in Asiam quaestor profectus, ibi per multos annos admirabili quadam laude provinciae praefuit"), noting Lucullus was quaestor under Sulla in 88 B.C., remained in the east as proquaestor until 80, and returned to be aedile in 79.
- Inscription no. 23, on a marble pillar before the mosque at Atlesser near Synnada, records a decree of the "συνέδριον τῶν [Φιλ]οσε[βά]στων Νέων" honouring Titus Aurelius Claudius Attalus, son of Claudius Aurelius Sat... Tertullinus, for his father's benefactions to the synedrion. Ramsay dates it "not much earlier than 200 A. D." and notes that colleges of Neoi, common in coastal Greek cities, also occur in upper Phrygia at Nacoleia and Synnada.
- Inscription no. 24, read "in a dark courtyard" at Synnada, is heavily restored and fragmentary; the legible portions include a name ending in "-ροδώρου τοῦ Λιμναίου" and honours involving crowns, a painted portrait, and a marble statue.
Methods
- Epigraphic publication: transcription, restoration (in brackets), and translation of Greek inscriptions Ramsay examined on stone at Synnada (Tchifout Cassaba) and Atlesser, organised by region (Phrygia, Lycaonia, Cappadocia, Cilicia).
- Historical commentary situating the texts against literary and epigraphic comparanda, including Cicero, the *Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum* (III, 562, 563), Delian inscriptions (*Bull. de Corr. Hell.* III, 147), Waddington's *Fastes des provinces d'Asie*, and Ramsay's own earlier publications.
- No systematic sampling or quantitative analysis is described; the method is individual autopsy and philological-historical interpretation.
Limitations
- The paper states no limitations of its own.
- Evident from the text: the supplied version is an uncorrected OCR of only pp. 297–300 of a 297–328 article, so most of the corpus (Lycaonia, Cappadocia, Cilicia) is absent and the Greek is frequently garbled.
- Many readings are explicitly conjectural, marked by bracketed restorations; inscription no. 24 in particular is fragmentary and read under poor conditions ("in a dark courtyard").
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
5 Sources not found · 4 Own interpretation
In the paper
“The colleges of Neoi, common in the Greek cities of the coast (1), are also found in upper Phrygia, at Nacoleia (2) and at Synnada.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1882. p. 125.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It was however attached to Cilicia under the government of Dolabella in 80 B. C, and the change must have been made for the first time in this year.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Synnada was attached to Cilicia under the government of Dolabella in 80 B.C.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This inscription is important as showing that Synnada was included in the province of Asia at the time when Lucullus governed it.”
boostedstates an associationSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Lucullus was quaestor under Sulla in 88 B.C.
- Rests on an assumption: Lucullus remained in the east as proquaestor till 80, returning to fill the office of aedile in 79.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The colleges of Neoi, common in the Greek cities of the coast (1), are also found in upper Phrygia, at Nacoleia (2) and at Synnada.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Collignon, Sur les Collèges de neoi
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Bull.de Corr. Hell. IV, 240; V, 389
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Inscriptions in honour of Lucullus are also known at Athens (C. I. A. Ill, 562,563) and at Delos (Bull, de Corr. Hell., III. 147 ) : the latter mentions that he was proquaestor at the time.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Bull, de Corr. Hell., III. 147
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“It was common during the next thirty years to place the three dioeceses of Synnada, Apameia, and Laodiceia, under the government of the proconsul of Cilicia (1).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Waddington, Fastes des provinces d'Asie, p. 23
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
- Probably not a substantial claim. 3
- It may state two separate claims as one. 1
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This inscription is not much earlier than 200 A. D.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Inscriptions in honour of Lucullus are also known at Athens (C. I. A. Ill, 562,563) and at Delos (Bull, de Corr. Hell., III. 147 ) : the latter mentions that he was proquaestor at the time.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites C. I. A. Ill, 562,563
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Bull, de Corr. Hell., III. 147
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In later years when the southern sea was perfectly safe, the governor of Cilicia probably went direct to his province.”
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper relies on this without support.
Lucullus was quaestor under Sulla in 88 B.C.
“Lucullus was quaestor under Sulla in 88 B. C.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Lucullus remained in the east as proquaestor till 80, returning to fill the office of aedile in 79.
“He remained in the east as proquaestor till 80, returning to fill the office of aedile in 79.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Synnada was attached to Cilicia under the government of Dolabella in 80 B.C.
“It was however attached to Cilicia under the government of Dolabella in 80 B. C, and the change must have been made for the first time in this year.”
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
McKechnie, P. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108686921 · Cited by 89
Hartmann, B. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108656917 · Cited by 62
Archaeology and Urban Settlement in Late Roman and Byzantine Anatolia
(2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108557757 · Cited by 14
"Pallakai," Prostitutes, and Prophetesses
Budin, S. L. (2003) · Classical Philology · doi:10.2307/1215498 · Cited by 14
Euchaïta: From Late Roman and Byzantine Town to Ottoman Village
Haldon, J. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108557757.010 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Ramsay, W. M.
- Corresponding author
- Ramsay, William Mitchell
- Venue
- Bulletin de correspondance hellénique
- Publisher
- PERSEE Program
- Published
- 1883
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 297-328
- ISSN
- 0007-4217 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4244550806
- Cited by
- 54
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2021: 2 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 19 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- fr
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- Bulletin de correspondance hellénique (publishedVersion)
- Persée (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Classics › Classical Antiquity Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Ancient Mediterranean Archaeology and History
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Ancient Near East History
- Keywords
- unpublished inscriptions, Anatolia, Greek inscriptions, epigraphy, ancient Anatolia
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
